Originally Posted by stevieray
the irony is thick in this post.
by this logic...
1) we should only care if certain races are insulted, therfore only holding certain races to standards we should all adhere to, and subsequently, implying that one race is superior and another inferior...that one ultimately deserves it and the other gets a pass on inappropiate behavior..soley based on their race.
2) you're white and you have it good only because of your race, and accomplishments of people of color/whites are ultimately marginalized, because otherwise, it's only special due to their race and not the individual...'the first black to'
30 we can use racism to diminish and control whites by assuming they are racist, and call them racist, because they as whites have it coming and we need to hold them to standards that we don't expect from other races.
....you're basically implying people of color ARE inferior and should be treated as such.
I want to respond to this post in earnest, but I'm having a tough time following it all the way because of grammar. I can only follow the 2nd point, and that seems like a leap to me to say that everyone's accomplishments are attributable only to circumstances of birth. Privilege is a head-start; it is up to individuals to do something with that head-start. And, yes, it is sad that we still pay attention to things like "first woman/black person/hispanic person/etc to _____," because those milestones should have been passed a long time ago.
As for the double-standard: I personally don't want to insult anyone based on nationality or race or whatever. But for the purposes of humor (which is what we're really talking about here -- the way that posters like Vailpass use race humor), there can be a double-standard, IMO. I forget which comic first said this, but there's a rule for good comedy: comedy only works when the butt of the joke is above your station. When white men make racist or misogynist jokes it causes a lot of people to bristle because of the actual power dynamics in society.